The Maastricht Acquisition Platform for Studying Mechanisms of Cell-Matrix Crosstalk (MAPEX): An Interdisciplinary and Systems Approach towards Understanding Thoracic Aortic Disease.

Current management guidelines for ascending thoracic aortic aneurysms (aTAA) recommend intervention once ascending or sinus diameter reaches 5-5.5 cm or shows a growth rate of >0.5 cm/year estimated from echo/CT/MRI. However, many aTAA dissections (aTAAD) occur in vessels with diameters below the surgical intervention threshold of <55 mm. Moreover, during aTAA repair surgeons observe and experience considerable variations in tissue strength, thickness, and stiffness that appear not fully explained by patient risk factors. To improve the understanding of aTAA pathophysiology, we established a multi-disciplinary research infrastructure: The Maastricht acquisition platform for studying mechanisms of tissue-cell crosstalk (MAPEX). The explicit scientific focus of the platform is on the dynamic interactions between vascular smooth muscle cells and extracellular matrix (i.e., cell-matrix crosstalk), which play an essential role in aortic wall mechanical homeostasis. Accordingly, we consider pathophysiological influences of wall shear stress, wall stress, and smooth muscle cell phenotypic diversity and modulation. Co-registrations of hemodynamics and deep phenotyping at the histological and cell biology level are key innovations of our platform and are critical for understanding aneurysm formation and dissection at a fundamental level. The MAPEX platform enables the interpretation of the data in a well-defined clinical context and therefore has real potential for narrowing existing knowledge gaps. A better understanding of aortic mechanical homeostasis and its derangement may ultimately improve diagnostic and prognostic possibilities to identify and treat symptomatic and asymptomatic patients with existing and developing aneurysms.

Outcomes of Elective and Non-elective Fenestrated-branched Endovascular Aortic Repair for Treatment of Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: To describe outcomes after elective and non-elective fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) for thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). BACKGROUND: FB-EVAR has been increasingly utilized to treat TAAAs; however, outcomes after non-elective versus elective repair are not well described. METHODS: Clinical data of consecutive patients undergoing FB-EVAR for TAAAs at 24 centers (2006-2021) were reviewed. Endpoints including early mortality and major adverse events (MAEs), all-cause mortality, and aortic-related mortality (ARM), were analyzed and compared in patients who had non-elective versus elective repair. RESULTS: A total of 2603 patients (69% males; mean age 72±10 year old) underwent FB-EVAR for TAAAs. Elective repair was performed in 2187 patients (84%) and non-elective repair in 416 patients [16%; 268 (64%) symptomatic, 148 (36%) ruptured]. Non-elective FB-EVAR was associated with higher early mortality (17% vs 5%, P <0.001) and rates of MAEs (34% vs 20%, P <0.001). Median follow-up was 15 months (interquartile range, 7-37 months). Survival and cumulative incidence of ARM at 3 years were both lower for non-elective versus elective patients (50±4% vs 70±1% and 21±3% vs 7±1%, P <0.001). On multivariable analysis, non-elective repair was associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 1.92; 95% CI] 1.50-2.44; P <0.001) and ARM (hazard ratio, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.63-3.62; P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Non-elective FB-EVAR of symptomatic or ruptured TAAAs is feasible, but carries higher incidence of early MAEs and increased all-cause mortality and ARM than elective repair. Long-term follow-up is warranted to justify the treatment.

End-of-life care and advance care planning for outpatients with inoperable aortic aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: A significant proportion of patients with abdominal and thoracic aortic aneurysms (AA) do not proceed to intervention after reaching treatment threshold diameter due to a combination of poor cardiovascular reserve, frailty, and aortic morphology. This patient cohort has a high mortality; however, until this study, there exist no studies on the end-of-life care conservatively managed patients receive. METHODS: This is a retrospective multicenter cohort study of 220 conservatively managed patients with AA referred to Leeds Vascular Institute (UK) and Maastricht University Medical Centre (the Netherlands) for intervention between 2017 and 2021. Demographic details, mortality, cause of death, advance care planning and palliative care outcomes were analysed to examine predictors of palliative care referral and efficacy of palliative care consultation. RESULTS: A total of 1506 patients with AA were seen over this time period, giving a nonintervention rate of 15%. There was a 3-year mortality rate of 55%, a median survival of 364 days, and rupture was the reported cause of death in 18% of the decedents. Median follow-up was 34 months. Only 8% of all patients and 16% of decedents received a palliative care consultation, which took place a median of 3.5 days before death. Patients >81 years of age were more likely to have advance care planning. Only 5% and 23% of conservatively managed patients had documentation of preferred place of death and care priorities respectively. Patients with a palliative care consultation were more likely to have these services in place. CONCLUSIONS: Only a small proportion of conservatively treated patients had advance care planning and this was far below international guidelines on end-of-life care for adults, which recommends it for each of these patients. Pathways and guidance should be implemented to ensure patients not offered AA intervention receive end-of-life care and advance care planning.

Comparison of single- and multistage strategies during fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of single or multistage approach during fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) of extensive thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). METHODS: We reviewed the clinical data of consecutive patients treated by FB-EVAR for extent I to III TAAAs in 24 centers (2006-2021). All patients received a single brand manufactured patient-specific or off-the-shelf fenestrated-branched stent grafts. Staging strategies included proximal thoracic aortic repair, minimally invasive segmental artery coil embolization, temporary aneurysm sac perfusion and combinations of these techniques. Endpoints were analyzed for elective repair in patients who had a single- or multistage approach before and after propensity score adjustment for baseline differences, including the composite 30-day/in-hospital mortality and/or permanent paraplegia, major adverse event, patient survival, and freedom from aortic-related mortality. RESULTS: A total of 1947 patients (65% male; mean age, 71 ± 8 years) underwent FB-EVAR of 155 extent I (10%), 729 extent II (46%), and 713 extent III TAAAs (44%). A single-stage approach was used in 939 patients (48%) and a multistage approach in 1008 patients (52%). A multistage approach was more frequently used in patients undergoing elective compared with non-elective repair (55% vs 35%; P < .001). Staging strategies were proximal thoracic aortic repair in 743 patients (74%), temporary aneurysm sac perfusion in 128 (13%), minimally invasive segmental artery coil embolization in 10 (1%), and combinations in 127 (12%). Among patients undergoing elective repair (n = 1597), the composite endpoint of 30-day/in-hospital mortality and/or permanent paraplegia rate occurred in 14% of single-stage and 6% of multistage approach patients (P < .001). After adjustment with a propensity score, multistage approach was associated with lower rates of 30-day/in-hospital mortality and/or permanent paraplegia (odds ratio, 0.466; 95% confidence interval, 0.271-0.801; P = .006) and higher patient survival at 1 year (86.9±1.3% vs 79.6±1.7%) and 3 years (72.7±2.1% vs 64.2±2.3%; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.714; 95% confidence interval, 0.528-0.966; P = .029), compared with a single stage approach. CONCLUSIONS: Staging elective FB-EVAR of extent I to III TAAAs was associated with decreased risk of mortality and/or permanent paraplegia at 30 days or within hospital stay, and with higher patient survival at 1 and 3 years.

European Multicentric Experience With Fenestrated-branched ENDOvascular Stent Grafting After Previous FAILed Infrarenal Aortic Repair: The EU-FBENDO-FAIL Registry.

OBJECTIVE: To report the mid-term outcomes of fenestrated-branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F-BEVAR) following a failed previous endovascular aneurysm repair (pEVAR) or previous open aneurysm repair (pOAR). METHODS: Data from consecutive patients who underwent F-BEVAR for pEVAR or pOAR from 2006 to 2021 from 17 European vascular centers were analyzed. Endpoints included technical success, major adverse events, 30-day mortality, and 5-year estimates of survival, target vessel primary patency, freedom from reinterventions, type I/III endoleaks, and sac growth >5 mm. BACKGROUND: Treatment of a failed previous abdominal aortic aneurysm repair is a complex undertaking. F-BEVAR is becoming an increasingly attractive option, although comparative data are limited regarding associated risk factors, indications for treatment, and various outcomes. RESULTS: There were 526 patients included, 268 pOAR and 258 pEVAR. The median time from previous repair to F-BEVAR was 7 (interquartile range, 4-12) years, 5 (3-8) for pEVAR, and 10 (6-14) for pOAR, P <0.001. Predominant indication for treatment was type Ia endoleak for pEVAR and progression of the disease for pOAR. Technical success was 92.8%, pOAR (92.2%), and pEVAR (93.4%), P =0.58. The 30-day mortality was 6.5% overall, 6.7% for pOAR, and 6.2% for pEVAR, P =0.81. There were 1853 treated target vessels with 5-year estimates of primary patency of 94.4%, pEVAR (95.2%), and pOAR (94.4%), P =0.03. Five-year estimates for freedom from type I/III endoleaks were similar between groups; freedom from reintervention was lower for pEVAR (38.3%) than for pOAR (56.0%), P =0.004. The most common indication for reinterventions was for type I/III endoleaks (37.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Repair of a failed pEVAR or pOARis safe and feasible with comparable technical success and survival rates. While successful treatment can be achieved, significant rates of reintervention should be anticipated, particularly for issues related to instability of target vessels/bridging stents.

Safety of Percutaneous Femoral Access for Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair Through Previously Surgically Exposed or Repaired Femoral Arteries.

OBJECTIVE: Percutaneous femoral artery access is being increasingly used in endovascular aortic repair (EVAR). The technique can be challenging in patients with previously surgically exposed or repaired femoral arteries because of excessive scar tissue. However, a successful percutaneous approach may cause less morbidity than a "re-do" open femoral approach. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of prior open surgical femoral exposure on technical success and clinical outcomes of percutaneous approach. METHODS: This study retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of patients who underwent percutaneous EVAR between 2010 and 2020 at 2 major aortic centers. Patients were divided into 2 groups (with or without prior open surgical femoral access) for analysis of clinical outcomes. Only punctures with sheaths ≥12Fr were included for analysis. The access and (pre)closure techniques were similar in both institutions. Primary end points were intraoperative technical success, access-related revision, and access complications. A multivariate analysis was performed to identify determinants of conversion to open approach and femoral access complications in intact and re-do groins. RESULTS: A total of 632 patients underwent percutaneous (complex) EVAR: 98 had prior open surgical femoral access and 534 patients underwent de novo femoral percutaneous access. A total of 1099 femoral artery punctures were performed: 149 in re-do and 950 in intact groins. The extent of endovascular repair included 159 infrarenal, 82 thoracic, 368 fenestrated/branched, and 23 iliac branch devices. No significant differences were seen in technical success (re-do 93.3% vs intact 95.3%, p=0.311), access-related surgical revision (0.7% vs 0.6%, p=0.950), and access complications (2.7% vs 4.0%, p=0.443). For the whole group, significant predictors for access complications in multivariate analyses were main access site (odds ratio [OR] 2.39; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07%-5.35%; p=0.033) and increase of the procedure time per hour (OR 1.65; 95% CI 1.34%-2.04%; p<0.001), while increase in sheath-vessel ratio had a protective effect (OR 0.33; 95% CI 0.127%-0.85%; p=0.021). Surgical conversion was predicted by main access site (OR 2.32; 95% CI 1.28%-4.19%; p=0.007) and calcification of 50% to 75% of the circumference of the access vessel (OR 3.29; 95% CI 1.38%-7.86%; p=0.005). CONCLUSION: Within our population prior open surgical femoral artery exposure or repair had no negative impact on the technical success and clinical outcomes of percutaneous (complex) endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.

Fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic repair using unilateral femoral access in patients with iliac occlusive disease.

OBJECTIVE: Fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic repair (F/BEVAR) in patients with occluded iliac arteries is challenging owing to limited access for branch vessel catheterization and increased risk for leg and spinal ischemic complications. The aim of this study was to analyze technical strategies and outcomes of F/BEVAR in patients with unilateral iliofemoral occlusive disease. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of all consecutive patients treated by F/BEVAR in two institutions (2003-2021). Patients with unilateral iliofemoral occlusive disease were included in the analysis. All patients had one patent iliac artery that was used for advancement of the fenestrated-branch component. Preloaded catheter/guidewire systems or steerable sheaths were used as adjuncts to facilitate catheterization. Primary endpoints were technical success, mortality, major adverse events (stroke, spinal cord injury, dialysis or decrease in the glomerular filtration rate of more than 50%, bowel ischemia, myocardial infarction, or respiratory failure), primary iliac patency, and freedom from reinterventions. RESULTS: There were 959 patients treated with F/BEVAR. Of these, 15 patients (1.56%; mean age, 74 years; 80% male) had occluded iliac arteries and 1 patent iliofemoral access and were treated for a thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (n = 8) or juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (n = 7). Brachial access was used in 14 of the 15 patients and preloaded systems in 7 of the 15 patients (47%). The remaining 53% had staggered deployment of stent grafts. There were seven physician-modified endovascular grafts, seven custom-made devices, and one off-the-shelf device used. Thirteen patients (87%) had distal seal using aortouni-iliac stent grafts and two (13%) had distal seal in the infrarenal aorta. Concomitant femoral crossover bypass (FCB) was performed in two patients and six patients had a prior FCB. Technical success was 100%. There were no intraoperative complications or early lower extremity ischemic complications, and all FCB were preserved. There was one mortality (7%) within 30 days owing to retrograde type A dissection. Major adverse events occurred in 20% of patients. The median follow-up was 12 months (range, 0-85 months). Two patients (13%) required three reinterventions. One patient required proximal stent graft extension for an acute type B dissection (3 months) and another required iliac extension for type Ib endoleak of an aortouni-iliac graft (21 months) and thrombolysis of that extension (50 months). At last follow-up, all patients had primary graft patency except one with secondary graft patency without new claudication. One patient had a single renal artery stent occlusion at follow-up with no r-intervention. The overall survival rate was 60%, without aortic-related deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Although challenging, F/BEVAR with unilateral femoral/brachial approach is feasible in patients with occluded iliac limbs, with an important rate of ischemic complications, but satisfactory outcomes.

Optimising Access Surgery in Senior Haemodialysis Patients (OASIS): study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Current evidence on vascular access strategies for haemodialysis patients is based on observational studies that are at high risk of selection bias. For elderly patients, autologous arteriovenous fistulas that are typically created in usual care may not be the best option because a significant proportion of fistulas either fail to mature or remain unused. In addition, long-term complications associated with arteriovenous grafts and central venous catheters may be less relevant when considering the limited life expectancy of these patients. Therefore, we designed the Optimising Access Surgery in Senior Haemodialysis Patients (OASIS) trial to determine the best strategy for vascular access creation in elderly haemodialysis patients. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: OASIS is a multicentre randomised controlled trial with an equal participant allocation in three treatment arms. Patients aged 70 years or older who are expected to initiate haemodialysis treatment in the next 6 months or who have started haemodialysis urgently with a catheter will be enrolled. To detect and exclude patients with an unusually long life expectancy, we will use a previously published mortality prediction model after external validation. Participants allocated to the usual care arm will be treated according to current guidelines on vascular access creation and will undergo fistula creation. Participants allocated to one of the two intervention arms will undergo graft placement or catheter insertion. The primary outcome is the number of access-related interventions required for each patient-year of haemodialysis treatment. We will enrol 195 patients to have sufficient statistical power to detect an absolute decrease of 0.80 interventions per year. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Because of clinical equipoise, we believe it is justified to randomly allocate elderly patients to the different vascular access strategies. The study was approved by an accredited medical ethics review committee. The results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and will be implemented in clinical practice guidelines. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NL7933. PROTOCOL VERSION AND DATE: V.5, 25 February 2021.

Cerebrospinal Fluid Drainage in Thoracic and Thoracoabdominal Endovascular Aortic Repair: A Survey of Current Clinical Practice in European Medical Centers.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this survey was to evaluate the daily clinical practice in European hospitals regarding the modalities to prevent spinal cord ischemia, with an emphasis on cerebrospinal fluid drainage (CSFD), in patients undergoing thoracic and thoracoabdominal endovascular repair. DESIGN: A 21-item online survey on current practice of spinal cord protection with an emphasis on CSFD. SETTING: Online service using Castor EDC software. PARTICIPANTS: Members of the European Association of Cardiothoracic Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care and European Society of Vascular Surgeons. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: One hundred eighty invitations were sent and 104 were used for analysis. A majority of respondents used a written protocol for spinal cord protection during endovascular thoracic and thoracoabdominal repair (81/104 = 78%). The most common protective measures used were CSFD (79/81 = 98%), controlled hypertension (59/81 = 73%), drugs (11/81 = 14%), and hypothermia (6/81 = 7%). The two most common indications for placement of a spinal catheter were the length of the stent (83/104 = 80%) and location of aneurysm (71/104 = 68%). Preventive placement of the spinal drain (96/104) is the most common approach. In the subgroup of high-volume centers, 86% (12/14) of the respondents used a written protocol and all protocols include CSFD. Ninety-two percent (11/12) had included controlled arterial hypertension in the protocol compared with 70% (48/69) of the non-high-volume centers respondents. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of European centers use a written protocol that includes CSFD. This survey showed the similarities and differences in the management of CSFD in patients undergoing endovascular thoracic and thoracoabdominal repair.

Fiber Optic RealShape technology in endovascular surgery.

Fiber Optic RealShape technology is a new endovascular guidance system that aims to simplify endovascular procedures by improving wire, catheter, and device visualization, while reducing reliance on ionizing radiation. Developed by Philips, the system uses light refracted through optical fibers to generate real-time renderings of wires and catheters in three-dimensional space. Currently, devices with embedded Fiber Optic RealShape technology are being studied in human patients undergoing endovascular procedures. Early findings demonstrate the technology to be safe and effective in offsetting procedural complexity. Research and development to improve rendering accuracy and expand the selection of available Fiber Optic RealShape-enabled endovascular devices continues.

Use of covered stent grafts as treatment of traumatic venous injury to the inferior vena cava and iliac veins: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Venous injury to the inferior vena cava or iliac veins is rare but can result in high mortality rates. Traditional treatment by repair or ligation can be technically demanding. A relatively new treatment modality is the use of a covered stent to cover the venous defect. The aim of the present systematic review was to assess the techniques, results, and challenges of covered stent graft repair of traumatic injury to the inferior vena cava and iliac veins. METHODS: The PubMed (Medline) and Embase databases were systematically searched up to September 2020 by two of us (R.R.S. and D.D.) independently for studies reporting on covered stenting of the inferior vena cava or iliac veins after traumatic or iatrogenic injury. A methodologic quality assessment was performed using the modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Data were extracted for the following parameters: first author, year of publication, study design, number of patients, type and diameter of the stent graft, hemostatic success, complications, mortality, postoperative medication, follow-up type and duration, and venous segment patency. The main outcome was clinical success of the intervention, defined as direct hemostasis, with control of hemorrhage, hemodynamic recovery, and absence of contrast extravasation. RESULTS: From the initial search, which yielded 1884 records, a total of 28 studies were identified for analysis. All reports consisted of case reports, except for one retrospective cohort study and one case series. A total of 35 patients had been treated with various covered stent grafts, predominantly thoracic or abdominal aortic endografts. In all patients, the treatment was technically successful. The 30-day mortality rate for the entire series was 2.9%. Three perioperative complications were described: one immediate stent occlusion, one partial thrombosis, and one pulmonary embolism. Additional in-stent thrombus formation was seen during follow-up in three patients, leading to one stent graft occlusion (asymptomatic). The postoperative anticoagulation strategy was highly heterogeneous. The median follow-up was 3 months (range, 0.1-84 months). However, follow-up with imaging studies was not performed in all cases. CONCLUSIONS: In selected cases of injury to the inferior vena cava and iliac veins, covered stent grafts can be successful for urgent hemostasis with good short-term results. Data on long-term follow-up are very limited.

Endovascular Treatment of Post Type A Chronic Aortic Arch Dissection With a Branched Endograft: Early Results From a Retrospective International Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the outcome of endovascular aortic arch repair for chronic dissection with a custom-made branched endograft. BACKGROUND: Acute type A aortic dissections are often treated with prosthetic replacement of the ascending aorta. During follow-up, repair of an aneurysmal evolution of the false lumen distal to the ascending prosthesis can be a challenge both for the surgeon and the patient. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, retrospective study of consecutive patients from 14 vascular units treated with a custom-made, inner-branched device (Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN) for chronic aortic arch dissection. Rates of in-hospital mortality and stroke, technical success, early and late complications, reinterventions, and mortality during follow-up were evaluated. RESULTS: Seventy consecutive patients were treated between 2011 and 2018. All patients were considered unfit for conventional surgery. In-hospital combined mortality and stroke rate was 4% (n = 3), including 1 minor stroke, 1 major stroke causing death, and 1 death following multiorgan failure. Technical success rate was 94.3%. Twelve (17.1%) patients required early reinterventions: 8 for vascular access complication, 2 for endoleak correction, and 2 for pericardial effusion drainage. Median follow-up was 301 (138-642) days. During follow-up, 20 (29%) patients underwent secondary interventions: 9 endoleak corrections, 1 open repair for prosthetic kink, and 10 distal extensions of the graft to the thoracic or thoracoabdominal aorta. Eight patients (11%) died during follow-up because of nonaortic-related cause in 7 cases. CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular treatment of aortic arch chronic dissections with a branched endograft is associated with low mortality and stroke rates but has a high reintervention rate. Further follow-up is required to confirm the benefits of this novel approach.

Stabilization of a steerable sheath during retrograde access to antegrade-oriented branches in complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.

During branched endovascular aneurysm repair, cannulation of the visceral target vessels through antegrade branches and insertion of bridging stents are frequently done from an upper extremity access. A retrograde femoral approach is a challenging alternative when an antegrade approach is not preferred. Herein, we describe a technique to increase stability of a steerable sheath, using a single suture, for bridging antegrade-facing branches from a retrograde access. This technique secures the sheath's deflected tip and provides more pushability to the steerable sheath.

Can Electric Nose Breath Analysis Identify Abdominal Wall Hernia Recurrence and Aortic Aneurysms? A Proof-of-Concept Study.

Introduction. This pilot study evaluates if an electronic nose (eNose) can distinguish patients at risk for recurrent hernia formation and aortic aneurysm patients from healthy controls based on volatile organic compound analysis in exhaled air. Both hernia recurrence and aortic aneurysm are linked to impaired collagen metabolism. If patients at risk for hernia recurrence and aortic aneurysms can be identified in a reliable, low-cost, noninvasive manner, it would greatly enhance preventive options such as prophylactic mesh placement after abdominal surgery. Methods. From February to July 2017, a 3-armed proof-of-concept study was conducted at 3 hospitals including 3 groups of patients (recurrent ventral hernia, aortic aneurysm, and healthy controls). Patients were measured once at the outpatient clinic using an eNose with 3 metal-oxide sensors. A total of 64 patients (hernia, n = 29; aneurysm, n = 35) and 37 controls were included. Data were analyzed by an automated neural network, a type of self-learning software to distinguish patients from controls. Results. Receiver operating curves showed that the automated neural network was able to differentiate between recurrent hernia patients and controls (area under the curve 0.74, sensitivity 0.79, and specificity 0.65) as well as between aortic aneurysm patients and healthy controls (area under the curve 0.84, sensitivity 0.83, and specificity of 0.81). Conclusion. This pilot study shows that the eNose can distinguish patients at risk for recurrent hernia and aortic aneurysm formation from healthy controls.

Comparing Mobile C-Arm with a Hybrid Operating Room for Imaging in Fenestrated Stent-Graft Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the advantages of a hybrid operating room (OR) (group 2) compared with a fluoroscopic mobile C-arm (group 1) during fenestrated stent-graft endovascular aneurysm repair (f-EVAR). METHODS: This single-center study retrospectively analyzed prospectively collected data of consecutive patients treated with f-EVAR for short-necked, juxtarenal, and suprarenal aortic aneurysms between January 2006 and July 2016. Primary end points were technical success and perioperative complications. Secondary end points included 30-day and 1-year mortality as well as target vessel patency. RESULTS: About 96 patients were treated (85 men; 74.1 ± 6.3 years); 46 patients (48%) belonging to group 1 and 50 (52%) patients belonging to group 2. Technical success was achieved in 92.7% of the procedures (group 1 91.3% vs. group 2 94%, P = 0.72). Significantly more complex interventions were performed in group 2 (n = 38 of 50) compared with group 1 (n = 14 of 46; P < 0.001), in which primarily renal f-EVAR interventions were performed. In group 2, significantly less contrast was used (median 150 mL vs. 100 mL; P < 0.001). The 30-day mortality in group 1 was 9% and 2% in group 2 (P = 0.14), and 1-year survival was also not significantly different between both groups. Target visceral vessel primary patency was significantly higher in group 1 (87.6% vs. 85.5% [P = 0.006] and 83.8% vs. 78.3% [P = 0.03]) at 6 and 12 months, respectively). There was no significant difference in renal artery primary patency at 6 and 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Immediate and 1-year outcomes after f-EVAR for abdominal aortic aneurysm were comparable using a hybrid OR compared with a mobile C-arm, despite the use of significantly more complex stent grafts in the patients treated in the hybrid OR. The use of a hybrid OR may assist in achieving satisfying results in complex f-EVAR.

Neurophysiological and paraspinal oximetry monitoring to detect spinal cord ischemia in patients during and after descending aortic repair: An international multicenter explorative study.

BACKGROUND: During descending aortic repair, critically decreased blood flow to the myelum can result in ischemic spinal cord injury and transient or permanent paraplegia. Assessment of motor evoked potentials (MEPs) has been shown to be a valuable tool which allows to detect spinal cord ischemia (SCI) intraoperatively within a therapeutic window suitable to prevent progression to paraparesis or paraplegia. MEP monitoring is not feasible during postoperative care in the awakening patient. Therefore, ancillary techniques to monitor integrity of spinal cord function are needed to detect delayed spinal cord ischemia. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether assessment of long loop reflexes (LLR; F-waves) and paraspinal muscle oximetry using Near-Infrared Spectroscopy (NIRS) are feasible and valid in detecting delayed SCI. METHODS: We aim to include patients from three tertiary referral centers undergoing aortic repair with MEP monitoring in this study.F-wave measurements and paraspinal NIRS oximetry will be operated intra- and postoperatively. Measurement characteristics and feasibility will be assessed in the first 25 patients. Subsequently, a second cohort of 75 patients will be investigated to determine the sensitivity and specificity of F-waves and NIRS in detecting perioperative SCI. In this context for the MEP group SCI is defined intraoperatively as significant MEP changes and postoperatively as newly developed paraplegia. CONCLUSIONS: A clinical study design and protocol is proposed to assess if F-waves and/or NIRS-based paraspinal oximetry are feasible and valid in detecting and monitoring for occurrences of delayed SCI.

Role of Vascular Smooth Muscle Cell Phenotypic Switching and Calcification in Aortic Aneurysm Formation.

Aortic aneurysm is a vascular disease whereby the ECM (extracellular matrix) of a blood vessel degenerates, leading to dilation and eventually vessel wall rupture. Recently, it was shown that calcification of the vessel wall is involved in both the initiation and progression of aneurysms. Changes in aortic wall structure that lead to aneurysm formation and vascular calcification are actively mediated by vascular smooth muscle cells. Vascular smooth muscle cells in a healthy vessel wall are termed contractile as they maintain vascular tone and remain quiescent. However, in pathological conditions they can dedifferentiate into a synthetic phenotype, whereby they secrete extracellular vesicles, proliferate, and migrate to repair injury. This process is called phenotypic switching and is often the first step in vascular pathology. Additionally, healthy vascular smooth muscle cells synthesize VKDPs (vitamin K-dependent proteins), which are involved in inhibition of vascular calcification. The metabolism of these proteins is known to be disrupted in vascular pathologies. In this review, we summarize the current literature on vascular smooth muscle cell phenotypic switching and vascular calcification in relation to aneurysm. Moreover, we address the role of vitamin K and VKDPs that are involved in vascular calcification and aneurysm. Visual Overview- An online visual overview is available for this article.

Duplex-guided versus Conventional Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty of Iliac TASC II A and B Lesion: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) requires the use of nephrotoxic contrast. Patients with chronic kidney disease are more prone to develop contrast-induced nephropathy after utilization of contrast. Doppler ultrasound (duplex)-guided PTA (DuPTA) is a novel technique and has recently proven to be a successful alternative to conventional PTA in the treatment of iliac stenotic disease, without the use of contrast. In this randomized controlled trial, we evaluated whether DuPTA is as effective as conventional PTA in the treatment of iliac arterial stenotic disease. METHODS: From June 2013 till January 2017, 142 patients with symptomatic peripheral arterial disease (PAD), with significant (>70%) iliac stenotic lesions (both isolated and patients with multilevel disease without treatment of other lesions), were randomized to receive either conventional PTA or DuPTA of the iliac lesion, regardless of renal function. All patients received an ankle-brachial index, arterial mapping with duplex, and magnetic resonance angiography in the pre-operative work-up. Primary end point was procedural success, defined as passing the guidewire through the stenotic lesion and performing a PTA, with or without stenting. Reduction in peak systolic velocity (PSV) of ≥50% after successful PTA was required in the DuPTA group. Angiographic reduction of more than 50% was required in the interventional group. Decrease in PSV was evaluated in both groups 4 weeks post-procedure. RESULTS: Passing of the guidewire through the stenotic lesion was achieved in 96.5% of the DuPTA group and 98.8% of the PTA group (P = 0.34). Although PSV decreased significantly in both groups 4 weeks post-operative, PSV reduction ≥50% was significantly higher in the DuPTA group, respectively 78% vs. 58% in the PTA group (P < 0.01). The utilization of stents was significantly greater in the DuPTA group (52% vs. 18%, P < 0.01). After correction of potential confounders, significant difference in ≥50% PSV reduction remained; technical success did not differ significantly. CONCLUSIONS: DuPTA is a feasible alternative to conventional PTA in the treatment of PAD on the iliac anatomic level. Duplex examination before removal of the guidewire is recommended to evaluate adequate decrease in PSV and identify potential recoil.

Prevention of postcontrast acute kidney injury after percutaneous transluminal angioplasty by inducing RenalGuard controlled furosemide forced diuresis with matched hydration: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) is often complicated due to postcontrast acute kidney injury (PC-AKI) in patients diagnosed with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Hydration therapy is the cornerstone in the prevention of PC-AKI. Furosemide forced diuresis with matched hydration using the RenalGuard system enables a steady balance between diuresis and hydration. A randomised controlled trial will be performed in order to investigate whether furosemide forced diuresis with matched hydration in combination with the RenalGuard system decreases incidence of PC-AKI in patients with CKD receiving a PTA of the lower extremities. Furthermore, we will investigate whether sampling of urine biomarkers 4 hours after intervention can detect PC-AKI in an earlier stage compared with the golden standard, serum creatinine 48-72 hours postintervention. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A single-centre randomised controlled trial will be conducted. Patients >18 years in need of a PTA of the lower extremities and diagnosed with CKD will be randomly assigned to receive either standard of care prehydration and posthydration or furosemide forced diuresis with matched hydration periprocedural using the RenalGuard system. Four hours postintervention, a urine sample will be collected of all participating patients. Serum creatinine will be sampled within 10 days prior to intervention as well as 1, 3 and 30 days postintervention. The primary endpoint is incidence of PC-AKI post-PTA. Secondary endpoint is the rise of urine biomarkers 4 hours postintervention. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Study protocol is approved by the research ethics committee and institutional review board (reference number 16 T-201 and NL59809.096.16). Study results will be disseminated by oral presentation at conferences and will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal. It is anticipated that study results will offer a solution to contrast-induced nephropathy in patients with CKD receiving a PTA of the lower extremities. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR6236; Pre-results. EUDRACT NUMBER: 2016-005072-10.